If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Repealing drunk driving laws would make us...safer?

Austin, TX Police Chief Art Acevedo would like see DWI laws supplemented with DWAI (Driving While Ability Impaired) laws (http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-...ge-958125.html). He wants to be able to prosecute those with blood-alcohol contents (BACs) between .05-.07, not the .08 and above that is the current minimum standard.

However, would repealing them entirely actually make us safer?

Acevedo mentions that people often concentrate on how many drinks they can have and still be legal. But aren't there people that are intoxicated at a .05 BAC? Of course, MADD agrees, saying that because some people could be intoxicated at a lower BAC, why not give law enforcement the tools to arrest them too?

In 2000, a federal law pressured states to lower the BAC threshold to .08. Interestingly, at that time, the average BAC in alcohol-related fatal accidents was .17, more than twice the new legal limit. 2/3 of them involved a BAC of .14 or higher. Even more interesting, drivers with a BAC of .01-.03 were involved in more alcohol-related fatal accidents than drivers with a BAC of .08-.10.

Once this went into effect, after a 20-year decline, alcohol-related fatal accidents actually increased. Those against the arbitrary .08 line predicted this. Those with BACs at .08-.10 typically don't drive erratically enough to attract attention, so police started setting up checkpoints to catch them. The problem? Every cop at the checkpoint is one cop not on the streets catching the erratic drivers who are more likely to cause fatal crashes. Accidents continued to increase until 2004, but statistics show that this was due to a drop in states that used checkpoints.

Beyond the dubious Constitutional validity of checkpoints, they also aren't very good at catching drunk drivers. They are, however, quite good at catching drivers with other infractions that create revenue. A 2009 study showed that checkpoints in CA increased revenue by $40 million, but also cost $30 million in overtime pay for police officers. According to the same study, a typical checkpoint would consist of 20 or more cops, yield a dozen or more vehicle confiscations, and around three drunk driving arrests.

So, does the threat of drunk driving come from alcohol itself, or from the impairment alcohol can cause? AAA's 2001 study showed several activities can be just as, or even more distracting than drunk driving, including eating and using the radio/CD player.

The argument would be that we should punish reckless driving no matter what the cause, whether it is alcohol--no matter the BAC--sleep deprivation, prescription meds, texting, or road rage. Yet for some reason, we treat someone who is driving at a BAC of .08 much more harshly than someone equally impaired who might be texting or dealing with their children. Would shifting our ideas away from alcohol simultaneously put the focus back on impaired driving while also restoring liberty? Would admitting that .08 is a poor barometer for alcohol-related fatal accidents actually make us safer?

Iam 52. In my younger years when the legal limit in Maryland was 1.0 or close to that I can't even count the number of times I must have been behind the wheel with .08 or so and drove home from the club or the bar or the ballgame. I NEVER had a wreck. In the 90's MADD along with certain politicians(guess which ones) lowered the legal limit in most states to .08. At 42 I was pulled over for doing 52mph in a 40mph zone and arrested for DUI too . I blew a .08 exactly at the station but was booked anyway and got probation and about a thousand dollar fine in court. It stays on your record as you can't get it expunged in MD(ironically you can get a simple posession pot charge expunged). If you travel internationally many countries including Canada won't let you in or charge you a temporary visa permit.If you apply for a job and they do a background check it shows up and you wont get hired. However, we just had a President who got one and he served 2 terms. I don't even use mouthwash anymore when I drive.I use cabs,limos and airplanes when I travel and use booze. I don't drink as much as I use too but the arrest has changed the way I live. I have friends who got busted second times for around.08 and went to jail and lost their jobs too. One man was a medical sales rep who was making over 100 grand a year and was the top guy in his company he now works in a cigar store making 10 dollars an hour and his wife dumped him too. I wish that other parts of our government worked as well as drunk driving enforcement. Just remember this Bud may not be for you.

EVH 1979: Well, actually it's not much of a vacation, because we run everything ourselves. We design our own album cover, we have to be in the office every day to sign checks - the whole corporation revolves around us. Nothing can be done without our approval. We even have photo approval.

I don't drink at all and have not for a decade and a half, but I think the laws in some cases are to harsh. A man or woman come home from a Christmas party, they had two or three drinks and they are barely over the limit and otherwise fine and they get thrown in jail with all the real criminal element. Na, I don't think so, it's not the same. It's all about freaking money grabs. Now, if you are truely drunked up, like a former mayor of my town and you drive through a toll booth and break the arm and don't realize it, yeah you need to be taken off the road. But this .08 bull shit helps put otherwise decent, good, non criminal citizens in jail, if only for a few hours. The record lasts forever.

The argument would be that we should punish reckless driving no matter what the cause, whether it is alcohol--no matter the BAC--sleep deprivation, prescription meds, texting, or road rage. Yet for some reason, we treat someone who is driving at a BAC of .08 much more harshly than someone equally impaired who might be texting or dealing with their children. Would shifting our ideas away from alcohol simultaneously put the focus back on impaired driving while also restoring liberty? Would admitting that .08 is a poor barometer for alcohol-related fatal accidents actually make us safer?

What do you think?

huge difference in this. I can turn around and say something to my kid and get in an accident. Is that careless? Sure. Can that be compared to some jackass getting drunk and getting behind the wheel? Hardly.

Personally I am more in fear of the texting drivers than drunk drivers or those who have had a few drinks. Whenever I have had a few, I find myself concentrating much more in driving than when I am going to work. Now I understand that there is a limit that shouldn't be passed but most people who drive after a few are looking at the road, paying attention.

Personally I am more in fear of the texting drivers than drunk drivers or those who have had a few drinks. Whenever I have had a few, I find myself concentrating much more in driving than when I am going to work. Now I understand that there is a limit that shouldn't be passed but most people who drive after a few are looking at the road, paying attention.

When you are texting you don't.

Drunk driving is bad but I think text driving is worse.

I don't think so. A texter is an idiot but can stop at anytime. A drunk is a drunk for the entire drive.

I don't think so. A texter is an idiot but can stop at anytime. A drunk is a drunk for the entire drive.

Hmm, usually the people texting are habitual. They text and get a reply back and respond and so on and so forth. With a husband that drives a truck, almost every day he comes home he says that he could have killed some idiot who was not paying attention but was instead talking or texting on their phone and he is just one driver.

I agree with Ziggy that while DWI is never a good thing, people tend to concentrate more because of it. I would also like to know the statistic of the number of accidents in which alcohol was involved BUT it was actually the other person's fault for the accident. You hear it on the news all the time "There was an accident on I70 westbound today which resulted in several people being transported to the hospital and shut down traffic during rush hour. Police on the scene said that alcohol was involved." which would lead the average person to think it was the cause of the accident but was it? Or was it some idiot not paying attention who caused it but the other person happened to have a BAC?

Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we are here we might as well dance.

Give me a guy coming home from the bar at 2am over an 19 year old girl texting her friends about some guy she thinks is hot.

I know from personal experience that I have had more "oh shit" moments in the last three years of my life due to texting than drinking for the last 20. I wish they would go ahead and ban texting and driving already.

I have driven home on a few occasions when I shouldn't have. Rarely have I ever seen the police. In fact, my strategy leaving a bar was to drive right down the main road out of town. In my experience, the police are not watching the main roads, but the side streets where the people that think they are too drunk to drive go. I've always wondered why the police weren't sitting just down the street from the bar watching everybody leave.

"Viking - last to sleep, first to rise, last to leave, that's how the Nords of old rocked the house." ~ timmac in the 'Texas Linkers' thread talking about yours truly. :-)

Give me a guy coming home from the bar at 2am over an 19 year old girl texting her friends about some guy she thinks is hot.

I know from personal experience that I have had more "oh shit" moments in the last three years of my life due to texting than drinking for the last 20. I wish they would go ahead and ban texting and driving already.

That reminds me of the insurance commercial with "Mayhem" driving and he says "I'm a teenager girl texting while driving" in the pink SUV that takes the bumper off a parked car. I love those commercials.

Originally Posted by Viking

I have driven home on a few occasions when I shouldn't have. Rarely have I ever seen the police. In fact, my strategy leaving a bar was to drive right down the main road out of town. In my experience, the police are not watching the main roads, but the side streets where the people that think they are too drunk to drive go. I've always wondered why the police weren't sitting just down the street from the bar watching everybody leave.

Here in OH, that would be considered entrapment.

Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we are here we might as well dance.

The other day at the mall I was walking towards my car and a young girl is texting while leaving her parking spot. Just plows right into another car and then has this dumbfounded look of "how did that happen?"

Hmm, usually the people texting are habitual. They text and get a reply back and respond and so on and so forth. With a husband that drives a truck, almost every day he comes home he says that he could have killed some idiot who was not paying attention but was instead talking or texting on their phone and he is just one driver.

I agree with Ziggy that while DWI is never a good thing, people tend to concentrate more because of it. I would also like to know the statistic of the number of accidents in which alcohol was involved BUT it was actually the other person's fault for the accident. You hear it on the news all the time "There was an accident on I70 westbound today which resulted in several people being transported to the hospital and shut down traffic during rush hour. Police on the scene said that alcohol was involved." which would lead the average person to think it was the cause of the accident but was it? Or was it some idiot not paying attention who caused it but the other person happened to have a BAC?

usually maybe it is. maybe someone who texts once will do it several times, maybe. But a drunk at the beginning of the drive is the end of the drive. No ifs or maybes. He/she is just a douche who belongs in prison.

That said, I hate both groups of people. But to compare someone who's hammered with someone who's dealing with a kid in the back seat is insane.

I have driven home on a few occasions when I shouldn't have. Rarely have I ever seen the police. In fact, my strategy leaving a bar was to drive right down the main road out of town. In my experience, the police are not watching the main roads, but the side streets where the people that think they are too drunk to drive go. I've always wondered why the police weren't sitting just down the street from the bar watching everybody leave.

Our little dedication to CRPS awareness. If you don't know what this horrible disease is, please click this link to learn more. My (Brett) wife suffers from this extremely painful and debilitating nerve disorder that doctors are just now learning more about and realizing the severity. Please consider donating to help doctors find a cure for what many call the "suicide disease." Thank you!